From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF65C33CB7 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:07:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB647207FD for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:07:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="LBahahea" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726671AbgA2NHj (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 08:07:39 -0500 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:40160 "EHLO aserp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726069AbgA2NHj (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 08:07:39 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 00TCrF6V012228; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:06:54 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=Ti8ZyKANi8j7nbulPgsnFv9qnobLhcvfN7U/r0qXW7E=; b=LBahaheaQvC3glSE4e8w07NZ4e3ZMriTaXdGJFAtdGuB2GraI+YteA2MAbZxwfBTY40l HuZOessuTUnU1X5x8qqSgOHwbIT3he0G7GFxjbucwmqWYzAg9vrCZOtPyYtgwsZaELFN 38ehsE4YZg7gSOr3FVgmNTR78IouMyz495eIB+OVXsAXUX4nhPY3Si8mx674EUqUspNb oTfEjDX3f6tkSraJ5DpYPTZ6L2R/BZPFU1ipG/iplPG/0uvRjWxioS0A3mPFCuB/5W// 4D0PM+bSYqdUSdkw5oRq90y+YnxoCvbLbLHTlrpR8hNTmumssS+LR4PhOD3m4SjzFvFO Fg== Received: from aserp3020.oracle.com (aserp3020.oracle.com [141.146.126.70]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2xrdmqn5ff-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:06:54 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 00TD2TvJ000907; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:06:54 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2xtmr94ng4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:06:53 +0000 Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 00TD6lGS005320; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:06:47 GMT Received: from dhcp-10-175-173-43.vpn.oracle.com (/10.175.173.43) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 05:06:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:06:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Alan Maguire X-X-Sender: alan@dhcp-10-175-173-43.vpn.oracle.com To: Frank Rowand cc: Brendan Higgins , Luis Chamberlain , Jeff Dike , Richard Weinberger , Anton Ivanov , Arnd Bergmann , Kees Cook , Shuah Khan , Alan Maguire , Iurii Zaikin , David Gow , Andrew Morton , rppt@linux.ibm.com, Greg KH , Stephen Boyd , Logan Gunthorpe , Knut Omang , linux-um , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , KUnit Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/6] kunit: create a centralized executor to dispatch all KUnit tests In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20191216220555.245089-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20200106224022.GX11244@42.do-not-panic.com> <594b7815-0611-34ea-beb5-0642114b5d82@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LRH 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9514 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=3 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-2001290108 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9514 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=3 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-2001290107 Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 1/28/20 1:19 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:40 AM Frank Rowand wrote: > >> > >> On 1/23/20 4:40 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > >>> Sorry for the late reply. I am still catching up from being on vacation. > >>>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 2:40 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote: > >>>> It does beg the question if this means kunit is happy to not be a tool > >>>> to test pre basic setup stuff (terminology used in init.c, meaning prior > >>>> to running all init levels). I suspect this is the case. > >>> > >>> Not sure. I still haven't seen any cases where this is necessary, so I > >>> am not super worried about it. Regardless, I don't think this patchset > >>> really changes anything in that regard, we are moving from late_init > >>> to after late_init, so it isn't that big of a change for most use > >>> cases. > >>> > >>> Please share if you can think of some things that need to be tested in > >>> early init. > >> > >> I don't have a specific need for this right now. I had not thought about > >> how the current kunit implementation forces all kunit tests to run at a > >> specific initcall level before reading this email thread. > >> > >> I can see the value of being able to have some tests run at different > >> initcall levels to verify what functionality is available and working > >> at different points in the boot sequence. > > > > Let's cross that bridge when we get there. It should be fairly easy to > > add that functionality. > > Yes. I just wanted to add the thought to the back of your mind so that > it does not get precluded by future changes to the kunit architecture. > > > > >> But more important than early initcall levels, I do not want the > >> framework to prevent using or testing code and data that are marked > >> as '__init'. So it is important to retain a way to invoke the tests > >> while __init code and data are available, if there is also a change > >> to generally invoke the tests later. > > > > Definitely. For now that still works as long as you don't build KUnit > > as a module, but I think Alan's new patches which allow KUnit to be > > run at runtime via debugfs could cause some difficulty there. Again, > > Yes, Alan's patches are part of what triggered me thinking about the > issues I raised. > > As Brendan says, any such tests probably shouldn't be buildable as modules, but I wonder if we need to add some sort of way to ensure execution from debugfs is not allowed for such cases? Even if a test suite is builtin, it can be executed via debugfs in the patches I sent out, allowing suites to be re-run. Sounds like we need a way to control that behaviour based on the desired test suite execution environment. Say, for example, the "struct kunit_suite" definitions associated with the tests was marked as __initdata; are there any handy macros to identify it as being in the __init section? If so, we could simply avoid adding a "run" file to the debugfs representation for such suites. Failing that, perhaps we need some sort of flags field in "struct kunit_suite" to specify execution environment constraints? Thanks! Alan